(1.) The fourth respondent who is the legal representative of the deceased first respondent has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated November 30, 1998 made in CM. A.No. 1055 of 1987 remanding the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner of Labour-I, Workmens Compensation, Madras-6 for fresh disposal after impleading the immediate employer, namely, Selvam Brothers as parties to the proceedings.
(2.) Respondents 1 and 2 who are mother and father of the Workman, K. Madhan, working under the respondents 1 and 2, have filed an application claiming compensation of Rs. 52,950 towards the head injury sustained by their son during the course of his work, due to which he became mentally handicapped.
(3.) The first respondent-Rasika Ranjani Sabha in their counter denying the allegations of the applicants, has stated that the claim is belated and he was not actually employed on October 1, 1984.lt is further stated that it is not a necessary party; that there is no privity of contract between it and Madhan; that he does not know whether Madhan was employed by the third respondent or not; that the alleged accident is false and hence, prayed for the dismissal of the application.